vast_list_archived_channels

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. The word 'all' contradicts the pagination parameters in the schema (limit/offset), suggesting the tool may not actually return all results in a single call. It does not explicitly state that this is a read-only operation or disclose pagination behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, concise sentence that directly states the tool's purpose. No unnecessary words or redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool is simple with well-documented parameters, but the description lacks information about pagination behavior, return format, or when to use this over similar tools. The 'all' vs pagination ambiguity creates a notable gap.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema fully describes both parameters (limit and offset) with 100% coverage, so the description does not need to add parameter details. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'List all archived VAST channels' clearly identifies the action (list) and resource (archived VAST channels). It distinguishes from sibling tools like vast_list_channels by explicitly specifying 'archived'.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies this is for listing archived channels but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like vast_list_channels or list_archived_channels. No exclusions or alternative references are given.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.